4 ms·
And that's fine. Assume both are true and come up with a plan to mitigate the next pandemic. Here's my bad idea: If China doesn't allow international monitorin
by 99_00 4y ago
And that's fine. Assume both are true and come up with a plan to mitigate the next pandemic.
Here's my bad idea: If China doesn't allow international monitoring of it's wet markets every person entering your country from China must quarantine for 14 days.
Any person traveling form a country that doesn't follow the above policy must quarantine for 14 days.
- nradov 4y agoThat's just pointless and unrealistic. While China should be encouraged to improve food hygiene practices, and end trade in endangered wildlife species, most zoonotic viral transmission events never had anything to do with Chinese wet markets. While we'll never know for sure, there is some circumstantial evidence that the 1918 influenza pandemic might have started in a US pig farm. And quarantine policies are ineffective without secure borders. Human trafficking gangs bring people from China to Mexico, then smuggle them over the US land border. All it takes is one index case to start spreading a virus in a new area.
- 99_00 4y agoYou're saying that because most zoonotic viral transmission don't come from wet markets, fixing wet markets should not be done. And that because some people cross the boarder illegally, boarder controls that keep out the vast majority of people should not be implemented. The problem with your reasoning is that it doesn't acknowledge that preventing some zoonotic viral transmission is better than preventing none. And reducing the number or rate of infected people entering an uninfected population is better than no reduction.